Why Calvinism is a bad thing.

He is very wrong about DTS. I stopped listen there.
Explain why.

Why should I believe you if you do not state why?

Do you know what year that was stated? Probably about 30-40 years ago.
He studied under Lewis Sperry Chafer.
And, did state "as far as he knows." Did you catch that?

I am not sure how DTS may have turned out today.

Listen to what he says may be a better course to take.
 
Last edited:
Explain why.

Why should I believe you if you do not state why?

Do you know what year that was stated? Probably about 30-40 years ago.
He studied under Lewis Sperry Chafer.
And, did state "as far as he knows." Did you catch that?

I am not sure how DTS may have turned out today.

Listen to what he says may be a better course to take.

I'm not a spring chicken myself. I knew DTS well 30 to 40 years ago. Calvinism was there. Wallace is probably one of the most noted influential Calvinists of his time. Not necessarily for his outspoken views on Reformed Theology.


I just don't like listening to people that bring in self serving anecdotal references.
 
I'm not a spring chicken myself. I knew DTS well 30 to 40 years ago. Calvinism was there. Wallace is probably one of the most noted influential Calvinists of his time. Not necessarily for his outspoken views on Reformed Theology.


I just don't like listening to people that bring in self serving anecdotal references.
Well he graduated under Lewis Sperry Chafer....
He did say.."as far as he knows."
He did not say he knows.

Sad how you plucked that out as the main issue and ignoring all the rest to be thrown in your dumpster.

Do as you wish, sir.
 
Well he graduated under Lewis Sperry Chafer....
He did say.."as far as he knows."
He did not say he knows.

Sad how you plucked that out as the main issue and ignoring all the rest to be thrown in your dumpster.

Do as you wish, sir.
Do as you wish. It is not like I haven't heard the argument before. Have you ever seen me post another's video to make a point for myself? I might state what I believe and then use a source in comparison but I very rarely do I do that. I don't know why people insist on allowing others to speak for them.
 
Do as you wish. It is not like I haven't heard the argument before. Have you ever seen me post another's video to make a point for myself? I might state what I believe and then use a source in comparison but I very rarely do I do that. I don't know why people insist on allowing others to speak for them.

I do not post videos like you speak of. I only came upon that one recently and thought for those whom God decreed to be edified by it would give it a listen at this time... But, I guess, as well as that? God decreed for you to have a bug in your bonnet over it as well.

Hey! Relax! God sovereignly decreed and had me post that video.

You act AS IF I HAVE FREE WILL, or something, to decide to post such a video. ;) :coffee:
 
I don't recall which thread it was where we discussed the part of Romans 9 "22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?"

But let me clarify something. "prepared" or "fitted" cannot be interpreted as "fitted themselves", but it IS passive. In other words, those prepared for destruction are so prepared for destruction by default. It is the default nature of all men. So this verse does not mean double-predestination or hyper-Calvinism.
 
I don't recall which thread it was where we discussed the part of Romans 9 "22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?"

But let me clarify something. "prepared" or "fitted" cannot be interpreted as "fitted themselves", but it IS passive. In other words, those prepared for destruction are so prepared for destruction by default. It is the default nature of all men. So this verse does not mean double-predestination or hyper-Calvinism.

"Prepared/Readied" is the best choice of words here. It is God's purpose for those who reject Him.
 
I don't recall which thread it was where we discussed the part of Romans 9 "22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?"

But let me clarify something. "prepared" or "fitted" cannot be interpreted as "fitted themselves", but it IS passive. In other words, those prepared for destruction are so prepared for destruction by default. It is the default nature of all men. So this verse does not mean double-predestination or hyper-Calvinism.

Why must God bear them with great patience?
He is holding back for a reason?

They are God's evidence on display before all angels to show especially the fallen angels, examples
of who and what the fallen angels are, seen by the lives of those condemned for God's wrath.

Why?:

For Satan and his angels are mega deniers of reality. Deniers of reality like the woke monsters who demand we play their unreality
game, by making us use their preferred pronouns which counter reality.

God makes the fallen angels to observe the unbelievers' actions and thoughts, as to see their own due condemnation before God.

God would much rather have them all be instantly gone into the incinerator to remove their stinking up the world.
But, now must patiently keep waiting until these mega denier angels can no longer deny their warranting of God's judgment

by seeing how the unbeliever is destructive and disruptive of all things God deems as being good? Over and over again?
The fallen angels will run out of excuses at some point and will have to admit that Jesus Christ is Just in judgment... and Lord!

There will be no ongoing appeal cases to be found in the Lake of Fire.

grace and peace ................
 
Exactly and the hardening comes after their rejection. God is not the cause of their rejection and hardening they are.

God said he would harden Pharaoh's heart.. It also says that Pharaoh hardened 'his own heart.'

But when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and would not listen
to Moses and Aaron, just as the Lord had said."
Ex 8:15

It would be like God saying, "I will choke that dog to death."
And, then places some snooty cat in front of a violent dog who is leashed on a chain near an edge of a cliff...

The dog did it to himself.

Likewise, all unbelievers harden their own hearts.

God simply provides chains and many .... 🐈🐈‍⬛🐈🐈‍⬛🐈
 
The answer is right there in the text. Read it.

What exactly is God "patient" with if not his own decrees?

But let me clarify something. "prepared" or "fitted" cannot be interpreted as "fitted themselves", but it IS passive.

Stop spreading misinformation please.

The passive and middle take the same form.

You are wrong.

Make an attempt to be more honest and not just let your bias lead you.
 
The answer is right there in the text. Read it.
"And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight."
Philippians 1:9​


We are not to go beyond what is written.
But, don't be confused.

"Insight" requires that we go INTO what is buried in what is written, and then to bring it out where it can be seen.


I will give you hidden treasures, riches stored in secret places, so that you may know that I am the LORD,
the God of Israel, who summons you by name." Isaiah 45:31​



Its always time to grow.....
 
The T of tulip is not true...
since what is depraved is carnal mind, flesh mind (=an entity),
which was acquired at the fall and which is not synonymous to the soul.

the soul herself who belongs to God was hurt by the fall
and acquired that mind but is NOT the same term as that mind...

the 'mind' as soul is a platonic concept, passed to church fathers...
a Greek view where the 'daemon' of wisdom IS the soul....
and for them, the soul was a god or oversoul, with no feelings,
a bit like a spirit guide. Very bad! the soul in this context
of the greeks had no body...it was only a daemon = demon.
an IT with no sex... and, the Greek language reflects its pagan belief,
having a neuter gender... but Hebrew will have none of that!

the soul in hebrew context before the fall is both soul and body, undivided,
npsh is the term... and is not synonymous to the Greek 'soul' concept
which has no sex and has no body but is an IT.

the term npsh is also not synonym of the current flesh body...
as we can see and witness that this body dies, is matter, and
is not the same as the soul...

the soul as undivided means one thing..
but for the material body, the greek type of soul
is a thing of parts... where death of the material body
and Its carnal mind disembodies when it dies, being inert matter,
and represents something outside of npsh...
which is His type of nature for us, the body made by God before
the fall.
Nothing of His is signatureless (such as in an 'It', inert matter, death).
His context is Life, not inert matter glued to a poor soul as is
our case now, but not for long because we have His promise He will get us out...

So the depraved is this fleshmind and its type of nature and body.
But the T in tulip, not understanding npsh and being Glued to Greek philosophy,
assumed that it was the soul God made which is depraved....

Nothing of His can be depraved!
 
Last edited:
Self-righteousness is the most prevalent sin of the human race and in the Body of Christ.

It is the easiest sin to commit and is always readily available as a constant temptation.
 
The T of tulip is not true...
since what is depraved is carnal mind, flesh mind (=entity),
which was acquired at the fall and which is not synonymous to the soul.

the soul herself who belongs to God was hurt by the fall
and acquired that mind but is NOT the same term as that mind...

the 'mind' as soul is a platonic concept, passed to church fathers...
a Greek view where the 'daemon' of wisdom IS the soul....
and for them, the soul was a god or oversoul, with no feelings,
a bit like a spirit guide. Very bad! the soul in this context
of the greeks had no body...it was only a daemon = demon.
an IT with no sex... and, the Greek language reflects its belief,
having a neuter gender... but Hebrew will have none of that!

the soul in hebrew context before the fall is both soul and body, undivided,
npsh is the term... and is not synonymous to the Greek 'soul' concept
which has no sex and has no body but is an IT.

the term npsh is also not synonym of the current flesh body...
as we can see and witness that this body dies, is matter, and
is not the same as the soul...

the soul as undivided means that the death of the material body
and Its carnal mind disembodies when it dies, being inert matter,
and represents something outside of npsh...
which is His type of nature for us, the body made by God before
the fall.
Nothing of His is signatureless (such as in an 'It', inert matter, death).
His context is Life, not inert matter glued to a poor soul as is
our case now, but not for long because we have His promise He will get us out...

So the depraved is this fleshmind and its type of nature and body.
But the T in tulip, not understanding npsh and being Glued to Greek philosophy,
assumed that it was the soul God made which is depraved....

Nothing of His can be depraved!

The word "depravity" has modern connotations that make it difficult to understand what "total depravity" means. The word "depravity" sounds like it's specifically talking about drug addicts, drunkards, murders, rapists, etc. But what "total depravity" actually means is that without first being born from above by the Holy Spirit, we are evil and unable to respond to the Gospel. Here's a scriptural description of total depravity:

Romans 3

“There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands;
there is no one who seeks God.
12 All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.”
13 “Their throats are open graves;
their tongues practice deceit.”
“The poison of vipers is on their lips.”
14 “Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 ruin and misery mark their ways,
17 and the way of peace they do not know.”
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

One might argue that Jesus contradicts this, "but you, being evil, know how to give good things to your son". How can it be true that "there is no one who does good" if Jesus says, "you, being evil, know how to give bread to your son"?

First, note that Jesus says, "you, being evil". That should tell you right there that our natural state is being evil. Unless we are born again, we remain evil. That is what "total depravity" means.

True good comes from God. A reprobate gives his son bread because it benefits himself. It's a source of natural obligation even if he doesn't want to do it, or even pride, which is evil. A believer gives his son bread because the Spirit of God moves him to do what's good.
 
The word "depravity" has modern connotations that make it difficult to understand what "total depravity" means. The word "depravity" sounds like it's specifically talking about drug addicts, drunkards, murders, rapists, etc. But what "total depravity" actually means is that without first being born from above by the Holy Spirit, we are evil and unable to respond to the Gospel. Here's a scriptural description of total depravity:
i agree souls need to meet Him, and return to Him...and bolded it...
but , just adding that the depravity IS
this body and fallen cosmology, this earth,
which I understand as not of or from God...
as a reason why the depravity itself...
for we entered into this evil realm where we are
because of adam..which realm/earth is not of Him and His Spirit...
 
Last edited:
Key is that the natural here (=this earth) is not of Him...
and 'natural obligation' referenced in your reply, then, is
but obligation to the fallen situation
and all its needs and wants.
the natural, as the flesh that wars with God..
being His enemy
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom